Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

[Omar 382]

In the first movie, it's introduced and is canon, that older version replicants are hunted and killed on sight. That's because they manage to break their conditioning and REBEL against their human masters (essentially resisting being slaves, with built in life-spans).

In a society where we build stronger, smarter, more beautiful humans, 'regular' humans are essentially outmoded, and cease to have purpose.

In the intervening years since the first movie, the earth has gotten MUCH worse (shown by the whole protein farm dealio, and the incredible shots of the massive garbage dump that is much of the western US), so the USE or UTILITY of humans is even worse off. How could you compete for a job with a replicant who is stronger/faster/better than you?

The movie posits this future, where essentially the future of mankind is 100% off planet. And that's why Niander Wallace convinces humanity to let him rebuild the replicants with new conditioning (supposedly safer). It's to colonize space. Replicants can go/do/survive where weak normal humans can't. (soldier Roy Batty in the original)

There's TONS of clues as to how solid the conditioning is on the new replicant models. Joe lies, Luv the assistant lies (and kills humans). They all cry when asked to do things they don't want to do.

If Wallace can build replicants who can procreate, he doesn't have to BUILD them anymore, and in his head, they can essentially be cheap slaves who can't run. (nod to American history)

He can then colonize space as he sees fit, without having to involve the authorities of government and their rules about replicants. He can BREED them.

So start there, there's PLENTY of other angles I can go down if you wish. You're not dumb, you're just suffering from a lack of imagination.

The 2049 future posits a literal turning point in the survival of the human race, or the ushering in of 'post' humans.

It's very fucking cool in the big ideas department. I can think of books that have touched it, but not sci-fi movies.

At the least, I'll admit that your plot seems a little more interesting than the actual film. Maybe DV can put in a call to you when they make Blade Runner 2087 in ~35 years.

 

[chf]

At the least, I'll admit that your plot seems a little more interesting than the actual film. Maybe DV can put in a call to you when they make Blade Runner 2087 in ~35 years.

Dude, that's all in the movie(s).

 

[Omar 382]

One thing that did cross my mind while watching: Why did they give "Look at me; I am the captain now," Avon Barksdale, Drax, and black dude from TWD all ~2 minute cameos? I mean, I'm sure they weren't that expensive, but it seems like their respective roles could have been filled by the average nobody.

Fuck, for $200 I'd put on blackface and mumble some gibberish in a foreign language about buying a horse....

 

[Omar 382]

Dude, that's all in the movie(s).

"At least I know that I don't know"

-Eminem

 

[chf]

Not to mention it's a staple of current sci-fi. Westworld - same underlying ethical questions. Humans, same deal. Battlestar Galactica, pretty central to the show's story. Upcoming show 'Altered Carbon,' yep, same questions. Hell even Mr. Robot wrestles with lower tech versions of the same ethical questions.

 

[Omar 382]

Dude, that's all in the movie(s).

But really, this is the first movie I've watched post-lobotomy. You should really cut me some slack. I was already an intellectually-diminished malcontent, now I'm just an intellectually-diminished vegetable.

 

[chf]

One thing that did cross my mind while watching: Why did they give "Look at me; I am the captain now," Avon Barksdale, Drax, and black dude from TWD all ~2 minute cameos? I mean, I'm sure they weren't that expensive, but it seems like their respective roles could have been filled by the average nobody.

Fuck, for $200 I'd put on blackface and mumble some gibberish in a foreign language about buying a horse....

Because they had stacks of resumes of actors who wanted to be in the project 12 feet high?

 

[SDPaddlefish]

Why is blade runner 2049 making very little money? I was hoping it would be a big blockbuster type

My friend,an avid movie goer and big fan of action films, absolutely hated the movie and gave it a 1 out of ten.

 

[Omar 382]

Because they had stacks of resumes of actors who wanted to be in the project 12 feet high?

That makes sense. Though if the stack of resumes was really that high, I think they could have pulled from the upper echelon of mediocre character actors. Give me a Gale Boetticher or a Betty Draper or even just archival footage of the guy who played Phil Leotardo doing his "Go home and get your shine-box" routine.

 

[Omar 382]

My friend,an avid movie goer and big fan of action films, absolutely hated the movie and gave it a 1 out of ten.

Cue @chf outrage in 3, 2, 1......

 

[chf]

My friend,an avid movie goer and big fan of action films, absolutely hated the movie and gave it a 1 out of ten.

That makes sense, since it wasn't going to be an action movie. Probably some people got misled a bit by the commercials.

 

[chf]

Cue @chf outrage in 3, 2, 1......

Nope, if you were expecting 'Fast and Furious in Space,' you were going to be pissed.

 

[Omar 382]

I'm going to bed. When I wake up, I hope to see @SDPaddlefish saying that his post had a typo and his friend is actually a really big sic-fi guy who gave Blade Runner 2049 a 1/10 (he also hates 2001, Children of Men, and Close Encounters). I then hope to scroll down and see a post from @chf that makes reference to rating the film in terms of MOVIE MAKING and something about the soundtrack.

It will be glorious.

 

[Omar 382]

Actually, last thing- I read that DV wanted to cast David Bowie for the role of Wallace (Jared Leto) before Bowie passed away.

That fucking blows (but then again, Bowie being dead just blows in general).

 

[jakedog56]

As already stated, the first movie was also a box office failure........at the start.

The good reviews should give it some legs. It will also do well post-theatre.

 

[olympicoscar]

A lot of different reviews on this picture. Saw it today with about 15 people in the theatre which is actually more than usual for a Thursday afternoon. Visually this picture is stunning. One of the best of all time in that area of movie making.

The story line can be a bit confusing, but it's obvious that the picture is about the meaning of humanity and whether or not man-made replicants can re-produce on their own. I enjoyed it but it could have used better editing to make the picture a little shorter. I would definitely recommend it and gave it a B.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

A lot of different reviews on this picture. Saw it today with about 15 people in the theatre which is actually more than usual for a Thursday afternoon. Visually this picture is stunning. One of the best of all time in that area of movie making.

The story line can be a bit confusing, but it's obvious that the picture is about the meaning of humanity and whether or not man-made replicants can re-produce on their own. I enjoyed it but it could have used better editing to make the picture a little shorter. I would definitely recommend it and gave it a B.

Your excessive use of picture...

 

[olympicoscar]

Your excessive use of picture...

Why is that a problem?

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Why is that a problem?

It's excessive and redundant

 

[olympicoscar]

It's excessive and redundant

Who assigned you to do a grammatical check of posts. That hasn't been done in years. This is a movie thread not a thread for English majors.